I have this hope that there will be a period of more interest in the future. Steel division: Suez 1956 or Steel Division: East Pakistan 1971 would both work for me.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I am sorry for you, that you are a wg elitist...
and I am sorry for you that you feel like shit posting in other communities forums....
Last edited:
I don't necessarily agree with the OP but I definitely don't like the Normandy focus. It's obvious the developers were going for something they could sell to the Americans, being the only part of the European theatre that the majority of them are familiar with.
I'm just glad that Canada got a mention since despite their contributions to the world wars they're usually talked down by the war profiteering yanks.
Nonetheless, I don't think the developers are capable of pursuing niche parts of conflict to appease the mass target audience since that would require them to include the countries they're marketing the game to. Sure, a Steel Division: Gallipoli might sell in Australia but it would alienate a lot of people whose country didn't have a stake in that theatre.
Better off just discontinuing this topic and patiently wait for the day that developers get comfortable enough to do something fresh for world war strategy games.
I'm just glad that Canada got a mention since despite their contributions to the world wars they're usually talked down by the war profiteering yanks.
Nonetheless, I don't think the developers are capable of pursuing niche parts of conflict to appease the mass target audience since that would require them to include the countries they're marketing the game to. Sure, a Steel Division: Gallipoli might sell in Australia but it would alienate a lot of people whose country didn't have a stake in that theatre.
Better off just discontinuing this topic and patiently wait for the day that developers get comfortable enough to do something fresh for world war strategy games.
Well, that means that at least Australia, New Zealand, UK, France, Israel/Palestine (to cover both bases), India, South Africa, and Turkey would be happy (just off the top of my head)...and you'd get battleships and submarines (Australia had one there, and based on Steel Div experience, that would round out to a squadron of subs per card).
Or they are just french developers working on one big part of french history...
Canadians did assault Juno and 1st Canadian Parachute Regiment did land along the british 6th Airborne division behind enemy lines.
"You know what'd be better than one of the biggest battles in Western European history? Two brushfire wars that a majority of consumers don't know much about, and of the minority that does know, a significant number do.not.care.about."
I'm quite happy with the World War Two Western European focus. There's no longer the complete dearth of Eastern Front games, I don't think the Pacific is realistically the right setting for this sort of game (I think a Pacific game would be better served as something where you have maybe a platoon to small company's worth of dudes on smaller more complicated maps).
The various brushfire wars of the Cold War are interesting, but they're not really something to hang a whole game on. A Cold War gone hot game would be neat if it was closer to SD in a lot of ways (or no more Norwegian-Japanese-Australian-German-French battlegroups,, no/very few prototypes, and a narrower time focus), but I've still got a sour taste in my mouth from how Wargames petered out (SERBIAN SUPER TEAM! Israeli intervention in Korea! 50,000 units, and only 30 of them are worth a damn!).
Basically I'd like a Pacific theater game that looks a like like COH in terms of gameplay/scale (30-40 "troops", and 2-3 AFVs per team on the battlefield being a "big" battle, no on-map heavy artillery, etc), or a Fulda Gap 1985-1991 game. Smaller focus, more detail.
I can do with some eastern Front give me some Romanian and Hungarian troops and throw the Nordlanders in has well.
Steel Division:
Ironically, Australia happens to be an ally of the US, as well as a diplomatic and trade partner of South Korea in various regional forums...co-incidentally, Australia was the first non-US nation to provide military support in the actual Korean War. In the Red Dragon context, having Australia represented is more than appropriate...considering that Australia and France have bilateral military ties, and have established a brigade/demi-division sized regional force (non-standing force, it's raised as needed) it is even more likely that both of them could get involved as a combined task force in regional conflicts.
That said though...
Steel Division: East Africa. (And it has the potential to provide a WW1 version as well, simply swap out Italians for Germans and you are good to go).
Ironically, Australia happens to be an ally of the US, as well as a diplomatic and trade partner of South Korea in various regional forums...co-incidentally, Australia was the first non-US nation to provide military support in the actual Korean War. In the Red Dragon context, having Australia represented is more than appropriate...considering that Australia and France have bilateral military ties, and have established a brigade/demi-division sized regional force (non-standing force, it's raised as needed) it is even more likely that both of them could get involved as a combined task force in regional conflicts.
That said though...
Steel Division: East Africa. (And it has the potential to provide a WW1 version as well, simply swap out Italians for Germans and you are good to go).